Browse the corpus

Outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Background: Success and event rates of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage vary with techniques, and results from different studies remain inconsistent. Objective: We conducted a proportion meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-guided biliary drainage and compare the outcomes of current procedures. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane and Web of knowledge to identify studies reporting technical success, clinical success and complication rates of EUS-guided biliary drainage techniques to estimate their clinical and technical efficacy and safety. Results: We identified 17 studies including a total of 686 patients. The overall clinical success and technical success rates were respectively 84% confidence interval (CI) 95% (80-88) and 96% CI 95% (93-98) for hepaticogastrostomy, and respectively 87% CI 95% (82-91) and 95% CI 95 (91-97) for choledochoduodenostomy. Reported adverse event rates were significantly higher (p = 0.01) for hepaticogastrostomy (29% CI 95% (24-34)) compared to choledochoduodenostomy (20% CI 95% (16-25)). Compared with hepaticogastrostomy, the pooled odds ratio for the complication rate of choledochoduodenostomy was 2.01 (1.25; 3.24) (p = 0.0042), suggesting that choledochoduodenostomy might be safer than hepaticogastrostomy. Conclusion: The available literature suggests choledochoduodenostomy may be a safer approach compared to hepaticogastrostomy. Randomized controlled trials with sufficiently large cohorts are needed to compare techniques and confirm these findings.